Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

Yes, if I don't have the absolute best quality I can get it drives me crazy.

I don't care what quality the things I'm downloading are so long as the file size is small enough. There are very few acceptions to that rule. Biggest one is if someone tried to edit shows using AI to enhance them by upping the resolution. Had one series I was so looking forward to watching after a long time torrenting that I had to delete because you could easily tell an AI (or someone who doesn't have a clue what they're doing) tried enhancing the resolution and made it unwatchable for me.

Edit: Damn, reread and I wish I could get 5mbps in the apartment complex I'm in! I'd be lucky if my download speeds spiked to 1mbps. All this with what is supposed to be the best ISP in the area, which is also an absolutely shitty company (xfinity).

I feel ya. I very rarely replace my devices and the internet speeds suck where I live anyway, so 720p is my go-to.

In my brain 720 is standard and 1080 is fancy, until I watch something at a friend's house and sometimes it looks so good it's unsettling

My internet has been so bad for so long that 720p looks way too clear for a video. Primarily 240p life

I don't have that much hard drive space to keep the giant high quality files and there are some shows that it's pointless. Why would I watch a 1080p version of something filmed on video for example

5mbps is high in my book, i used to download 1080p stuff and games on an adsl network and trust me I WISHED that shit could reach 5mbps ! Most of my pirate life i'd have miraculous spikes at 1mbps and i still always went for 1080p stuff or if I can't find it in that quality 720. To me when i watch something i want to enjoy it to the fullest so i don't even bother with lower quality, i don't have 4k hardware so i don't bother with that.

(I've enjoyed fiber connection for a year or two and i always get surprised by the speed of it lmao)

I mean, quality is nice. But prefer the better streaming experience and faster d/l of 1080 vs 4k. Won't go lower than that though. What really gets me is when audio quality isn't good or not clearly listed that it's 5.1 channel though. I don't like to skimp on audio experience.

I cant say I care as much as I used to, since encoding has gotten quite good, but I have also gotten better at seeing (aka. worse at being distracted by) compression artifacts so while I am less of a perfect remux rip supremacist, I'm also more sensitive to bad encodes so its a double edged sword.

I still seek out the highest quality versions of things that I personally care about, but I don't seek those out for absolutely everything like I used to. I recently saved 12TB running a slight compression pass on my non-4k movie library, turning (for example) a 30gb 1080p Bluray Remux into a 20gb H265 high bitrate encode, which made more room for more full fat 4K bluray files for things I care about, and the few 1080p full remuxes I want to keep for rarities and things that arent as good from the 4k releases or the ones where the 4k release was drastically different (like the LOTR 4k's having poor dynamic range and the colours being changed for the Matrix etc), which I may encode in the future to save more space again. I know I can compress an 80gb UHD bluray file down to 60gb with zero noticeable loss, thats as far as I need to go, I don't need to go down to 10gigs like some release groups try to do, and at that level of compression you might as well be at 1080p.

I cant go as low as a low bitrate 720p movie these days as I'm very close to a large screen so they tend to look quite poor, soft edges, banded gradients, motion artifacts, poor sound etc. but if I were on a smaller screen or watching movies on a phone like I used to, I probably wouldn't care as much.

Another side to my choice to compress is that I have about 10 active Plex clients at the moment and previously they were mostly getting transcoded feeds (mostly from remux sources) but now most of them are getting a better quality encode (slow CPU encode VS fast GPU stream) direct to their screens, so while I've compressed a decent chunk of the library, my clients are getting better quality feeds from it.

Here's my twisted life exposed...I have no issue watching 1080p on my QLED 4K TV. I game at 1080p happily, I honestly don't give a shit about 4K content.

1080p looks good enough for me, and I actually watch 720p on my phone screen half the time too.

And not because of lack of speed, I have a 1Gbps+ fiber line up and down.

And tbh, if it means I get to own and control my media, I would tolerate even worse quality if that's what I needed to do.

Grunge computing ftw! Quality at the cost of your soul? Fuck that!

Reasons why MinX versions are usually available. Whether for bandwidth purposes, just not giving a fuck about HD, or not wanting to buy larger Hard Drives to save overlarge content, there's plenty of people with plenty of reasons to prefer smaller files.

I download everything in the best quality I can find and will sometimes replace it when there’s better quality available. I can afford storage and I don’t really care how long it takes to download as I have other stuff to watch/play anyways.

576p for life.

Same here I use to watch videos at 720p (sometimes even at 480p) 👍

I typically look for 1080p X265 encodes around 2-4 mbps to save disk space. I will download higher bitrates for anything with a lot of film grain since it will get very blocky at lower bitrates.

I can't tell much difference between 1080p and 4K unless I'm very close to a large screen. Also, most 4K files are HDR and I don't have anything that supports HDR.

To be fair, resolution is not enough to measure quality. The bitrate plays a huge role. You can have a high resolution video looking worse than a lower resolution one if the lower one has a higher bitrate. In general, many videos online claim to be 1080p but still look like garbage because of the low bitrate (e.g. like on YouTube or so). If you go for a high bitrate video, you should be able to tell pretty easily, the hair, the fabric, the skin details, the grass, everything can be noticeably sharper and crisper.

Edit: so yeah, I agree with you, because often they are both of low bitrate...

I usually stick to 1080p medium for movies and TV shows I want to rewatch, 720p for the stuff I'll watch once.

For movies I try to stick to a 2-5GB filesize, and TV shows between 200-400MB per episode.

You're not alone.

On a good large screen, 1080p is a noticeable upgrade from 720p.
But the distance you'd have to sit at, to get much out of 2160p over 1080p, is just way too close.
However the High Dynamic Range that comes with 4K formats and releases IS a big difference.

On the other hand, storage is pretty cheep. A couple cents per GB really.
But you're talking more about bandwidth, which can be expensive.

But yeah. You're not alone.

I usually take BDRAW, transcode by myself. Or the best quality I can find. Does it look better? Not really. Just the data hoarder inside kicked in. 720p is totally fine.

720 isn't low quality

I'm with you. 720p unless I can't find lower than 1080 — for my setup there isn't much point. The TRaSH guide parameters make my head ache thinking how much I'd be shelling out on bandwidth and storage for no discernible difference on my home theatre.

I do have a 4k tv, and a 1080p one. But personally I don't see big difference on 720p vs 1080p vs 4k. I have to be like 4 feet from the tv to notice it. 720p is sufficient.

Nope. I have fast internet and good displays and I still prefer 720p video. I just don't see the benefit of multiplying the filesize by 4 to see marginally more detail. Even 4k, if I wanted to have a 4k display, I've seen people's displays and after the initial disorientation and crispness, the appeal wears off. 720p is perfectly adequate.

I do this with music. All of my library is stored as mp3s, which doesn't really make a difference quality wise considering I mostly just use a cheap pair of earphones. I'm not an audiophile anyways. In addition I also store a copy of my music library in my phone for offline usage, and that's where the compression comes in handy.

Not just you. Low(er) quality downloads are still a huge part of the torrent scene, see how popular most 720p YIFY uploads are even though their encoder quality is pretty garbage. Most people in general want a fast download and are viewing on a small laptop or even phone screen and don't give a rats ass about fidelity, LQ works perfectly fine for this. Even I'll grab a LQ once in a while if it's something my girl and I want to watch that night and I didn't plan ahead.

The desire for high quality uploads is more for people running home setups like Plex, where it's better to keep a HQ source file and have it transcoded to lower resolutions by your home server setup as necessary. They generally aren't storage constrained as an 8tb hard drive for a normal PC is fairly cheap these days. I'd wager maybe <30% of torrenters actually go after ultra HQ uploads based off seeder numbers.

Personally I stick to stuff that is at least 1080p with HDR and H265 encode preferred, because I archive most everything I download due to similar problems with internet speed. Over maybe 12 years of torrents I've amassed a hair over 5tb of content, and that's a LOT of movies l, it all fits on a single $120 external HDD.